I sent over 10k personal thank you videos to my customers
marshallhaas.com
marshallhaas.com
It's astounding to me that the founder not only did this but then wrote a blog article bragging about it as if this was good idea. Clearly the customers thought this was real (as seen in their replies), I can't imagine most of them would feel the same way if they knew it wasn't personalized at all and was just a deepfake.
The bit about "I would clone myself to greet people so I could work in the back", is super cringe. I'm not even going to open that can of worms... I don't believe this is ethical at all unless there was a clear disclaimer (which it appears there was not). Lastly "the genie is out of the bottle" is a terrible justification.
The lack of self-awareness these people show and even brag about when they manipulate, fake and scam every single aspect and gesture where it still might exist any real connection between humans is astonishing.
This is yet another scorched-earth marketing tactic, it might be "good" for those doing it first ( which is what matters in this damn tech war-economy ) but the price of broken trust, cynicism and apathy that follows is something that affects the whole.
Very well said.
>If I was a retail store owner greeting customers at the entrance and someone came to me and offered to place a clone to do the same job, so I could be productive in the back, would I take that offer? Yes.
No you wouldn't. Because a creepy clone at the entrance that is unable to reply to customers or interact with them in a genuinely dynamic way would be terrible. Which is what this is.
I don't like being negative but this, this just sucks. You're tricking people in believing you paid a higher cost for that video than you did and thus about the amount of fucks you give about them. Furthermore once more companies start doing this, this format will lose it value because it no longer demonstrates anything even from actual genuine people.
Instead I would probably hire someone to greet people, if I felt that was what I needed to make my customers feel welcome. (Or maybe I'd have a sign with my name and picture on it and a message to customers, or maybe I'd train existing employees to greet customers while working. Normal retail customer service.)
Going a step farther, if I had that employee pretend to be me, and then customers found out they were not, I would at the very least lose some customers and probably get the reputation that I try to trick people. This is a really neat trick (for now) with the new technology, but like handwriting fonts on junk mail it doesn't play well once people figure it out.
The root of the problem is why customers respond well to these videos: they're surprised and impressed that the CEO of the company would take time out of his day to record a thank you video just for them. And the fact is: the CEO did not. It's deception, plain and simple. Not big, evil, Theranos-level deception, but deception still.
To put it another way, how do you think customers would respond if, along with each email, you included some text saying "this video was automatically generated"? I'd assume pretty poorly. The difference between that response and the actual response is the value of the deception here. I think that "if we were honest about this, customers wouldn't like it" is a good litmus test for whether you're doing an ethical thing or not.
Really, I think this is doing a sort of trust arbitrage. The tech exists to fake personal videos now, but customers aren't widely aware of it. You can take advantage of that difference with stunts like this. In a few years, people will know this can easily be done and the value of personal videos will drop. At some point it'll be no different to the average customer than an email with "Hi <name here>!" or a letter with faux-handwriting on it.
If you think the blog post is bad, just watch the video on windsor's website: https://www.windsor.io/#video
The CEO plainly says he has time to work on other important things. Jesus, even creating the video in the first place, requires you to say Hey First Name
Sure, it's going to improve a lot, but since the first iteration of automated, personalized video messaging is so low-effort, I actually think people will just be inoculated against the whole idea. As in, don't watch the videos at all.
Your opinion is very important to me and I would like to take a moment to tell you personally how much I care about whatever you say.
I'd be available for a call between 1am and 11pm if you want to discuss one amazing opportunity.
Lisa - VP of Deceptive Marketing.
Hey rebuilder,
Sorry for spelling up your name incorrectly, we probably had a computer problem over here.
I have recorded a video just for you to apologize.
https://share.synthesia.io/e07bf638-1385-4c92-9970-940a0ebe7...
Lisa - VP of mass-emailing.
> I think that "if we were honest about this, customers wouldn't like it" is a good litmus test for whether you're doing an ethical thing or not.
Or put another way, people will have to do different things (which aren't easily automated) to earn that value.
Recipients take time to respond to what is in essence a spam email. If anyone sends this stuff to me, they'll go on the block list - but if it gets widespread enough then its the 'future' - an inbox full of 'personal' video /audio messages..
Quick someone make a spamfilter for AI videos :)
Your opinion is very important to me and I would like to take a moment to tell you personally how much I care about whatever you say.
I'd be available for a call between 1am and 11pm if you want to discuss one amazing opportunity.
Lisa - VP of Deceptive Marketing.
Hello $HN_NICKNAME,
Are you still reading HackerNews ? I have this amazing opportunity, lifetime opportunity.
It is the end of Q2, and my boss marshallhaas.com has agreed to make an exceptional discount just for you.
Are you available for a call tonight between 4 am and 6 am ?
Lisa.
I should dress as the Joker for Halloween
EDIT: Let me elaborate. in the 90s, remembering someones birthday with a card was meaningful because you REMEMBER their birthday and took action on it. today, people use Google Calendar to remind themselves to send that 'Happy Birthday' texts, and its not dishonest or deceptive.
In this case its taking that concept of using tech to enhance your abilities to the Nth degree.
now I have that song stuck in my head. M O, M O R
Since all advertising is the practice of psychological manipulation how is this particularly different? Is all advertising unethical?
Even if the process is automated, if the end result is to evoke a nice sentiment in someone, is that really a bad thing? Wouldn't the ethics really come into play in using such tech to rip people off in a variety of ways rather than to merely say thank you for your purchase?
Devils advocate off
I think there's a strong argument to be made that the efficacy of this approach is more tied to the visual senses and novelty of it. It's not just the personalization since as you've pointed out it's no different than a personalized email.
Ultimately it's just a tool, and how people choose to use those tools is all that really matters.
A friend of mine ran a ecommerce company where for years they would physically record at least a couple hundred personalized thank you videos for people each day. While they were quite successful and people really dug them, I can tell you for a fact that such messages may as well have been automated because there's very little you actually know about your customers beyond their purchase/purchase history that you can truly personalize your message to them with.
Yes, because it only evokes a nice sentiment if you lie about how it was made. Magic tricks are still fun even if you know they're tricks. This is not at all fun once you know it's a trick.
Even if it's inherently considered dishonest by some, the same should be vigorously argued for all email/snail mail you have received for decades and frankly I can't remember the last time I've seen someone complain about a personalized email being dishonest.
"I am amazed by the customer service...It makes me very happy that the team is so invested"
"I can't imagine how much effort must go into doing this"
"This is the first time in my life that I receive a personalized video from the founder of a company"
"This means a lot to me"
"I really appreciated the personal attention"
"I don't know how you have the time!"
I actually find the act of doing that far more manipulative than automated thank you videos.
1. In no world would I ever believe that a cold email was significantly personalized/targeted, except if the overall content were highly specific to me. This might be wrong a good portion of the time, but it is what it is.
2. Even if I were 100% unaware of the existence of AI/ML, a video wouldn't change my mind about #1. I would be more inclined to think that they'd recorded themselves rattling off a list of customer names and then stitched that into the main video, or just rerecorded the same video hundreds or thousands of times. The latter would take some dedication, and be a pretty big waste of time, but it wouldn't convince me that the sender knows or cares more about me personally.
3. Including a video message in an email in itself is uncommon in and of itself, personalized or not. If the technique increases conversions, this alone could be a sufficient explanation. To the extent that the personalization does further increase conversions, it's equally valid to hypothesize that a novel tech demo catches their attention as it is to hypothesize that people are being deceived. Personally, I would lean toward the former.
As an aside, even in the promotional video on Windsor's home page, the videos are kind of uncanny valley. May not be a big deal if the recipient doesn't think too much of one word being slightly garbled because the remaining speech sounds natural, but I'd be concerned about it completely butchering some names (particularly longer ones).
Do you mean "is psychologically manipulating people to buy shit they neither need nor want" ethical? Because that's largely how modern advertising operates.
This was my exact thought as I read this article. The other part to this is that it comes at a societal cost: it will add another layer of distrust and cynicism in how we communicate, all at the expense of a short-term value to a handful of companies that race to maximize the value of this technology over the coming years.
That said, I would argue that this specific practice will become more ethical over time (as the arbitrage opportunity disappears). Once customers are aware of the practice, the trust difference fades, and the deception goes away. 10 years from now, this practice will be equivalent to claiming "Famous Fishtoaster's has the best fish toast in the world": it's a lie, but one that all parties know is false so no one is being deceived. Just like no one really believes personalized text in an email implies that that email was handwritten anymore, no one will believe these videos are personalized and the problem goes away.
But yeah, it will be a societal cost: one less thing we can trust. Just like "photos don't lie" went out the window with widespread photoshopping, so will trust in personalized videos.
But video is the final frontier of digital trust. Once photos, video, and audio can no longer be trusted, what will people trust?
Digital cynicism will become total.
The fact that there is no disclaimer on this video shouldn't be worse than the fact that there is no disclaimer on emails saying "this email was automatically generated."
This gives me the same warm fuzzy feeling that I'd get when I read an email with my name in it even though 99% of times I'm sure it's not really sent just to me and is auto-generated.
Over time auto-generated videos will become as common as auto generated emails.
"Tired of your awful insurance. Like ugh, us too! Insurance can be like, so heckin lame sometimes. Let me let you know about [INSURANCE BRAND] ... "
That stuff is absolutely psychotic and is an instant red flag. Just say "Buy this insurance, it's cheap and has features x y z w" and be done with it. I'm not your bff.
This is kind of an aside, but I feel like fast food companies have really taken over this area. Wendy's posting on twitter like "feelin heckin smol right now. normalize self care." NO! Give me McDonalds -- they show a huge picture of the burger with big text that says "Eat This Burger Now" or whatever. That's all I want from you people!
/rant
"Listen, Caleb. Your application was very strong. Unfortunately, our strategy group just hasn't found an opening for you."
Caleb sighs, and says nothing.
The HR employee gently asks, "Caleb, are you still with me?"
"Ok, thank you. Is there anything I should be working on to make myself a better candidate?"
"Like I said, your application was very strong. We just don't have anything that would be a great fit for you right now."
"If I'm not a good fit, is there a different shape I could squeeze myself into?"
There is a pause.
Caleb asks, "Hey, no offense but... are you human?"
"I'm Shaun," the voice says. "I can help you with all kinds of resources... anything else I can do for you today, Caleb?"
This feels a lot like that.
It did polite social chitchat quite well.
But there were a few tell-tale signs: the bot would never interrupt or overlap my talking. It would always wait until I finished speaking to parse my speech, and its pauses were very consistent and slightly longer than what was natural.
When I asked it if it were a robot, it replied, "(giggle) why, do I sound like a robot?"
When I threw it a few unconventional questions, it quickly became clear that there was a script.
"Is this genuine? Of course, it's just as genuine as if I had a clone replace me in all personal interactions so I could get on with stuff I actually care about." How is this not a parody?
Edit: From another comment, he's an investor (https://angel.co/company/windsor-2/funding). Must have slipped his mind when he was writing the "Ethics" section.
I'm guessing soon it will be like the automatic emails which address you like "Hello {{first}} {{last}}!" and anytime I see anyone using my name in subject line it generally has quite the opposite effect on me.
I'm guessing same is gonna happen to videos. As the saying goes, fool me once...
I keep up with hundreds of people in my job and something personal like this really goes a long way.
Don't get me wrong, receiving a personalized letter is very much appreciated and I appreciate it more because they put extra thought in it, but very few would think of it as actually handwritten by a human.
Then again, I often aspire to send cards and don't, so this is definitely better than nothing, especially if you personalized the messages.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygraph_(duplicating_device)
Look at all these suckers who took the bait! Just think what automatic catfishing could do for your business!
Now, if only you could automate the second layer and keep that Awesome Customer Engagement going, all without the pesky time sink of human involvement. Just do a sentiment analysis on the email the customer sent and send them the appropriate response video -- either "Wow Andrew, thanks so much for your reply Andrew! It's always great to hear from our favorite customers like you Andrew!" or "Andrew, I'm so sorry to hear that you aren't completely satisfied. Andrew, I'm putting you directly in touch with Jen, who leads our Andrew Satisfaction department. Just give her a call at 555-123-4567 and follow the prompts to indicate whether this is about a return, a new order, or the status of an existing order."
https://angel.co/company/windsor-2/funding
There's zero reason to believe any of the data is true.
What this guy did is appalling…
Does a deep-faked video thank-you from the CEO feel more or less sincere than other long-established gestures?
1. Flowers organised by assistants with a card signed “by the CEO” without their knowledge or involvement. (“Thank you for the flowers!” “The flowers? Oh, yes. The flowers.”)
2. An assistant PMing everyone individually on a company Slack channel from the CEO's account to say how _deeply valued_ they are as a SincereApp employee.
3. Thank-yous ghost-written by professional writers bearing another's signature. (Freelance letter writing exists already, although not to the extent that it's portrayed in _Her_ where lovers, family members and professional colleagues hire Joaquin Phoenix as Theodore Twombly to write their personal correspondence and love notes for 20 years straight.)
4. Professional actors or celebrities congratulating strangers they don't know. (Already exists at https://www.cameo.com/.)
5. Handwritten notes from company employees thanking you for your belief in their company, when handwriting a note is a to-do on a packing and shipping checklist.
6. Mailmerged printed marketing proclaiming, “You're our favourite customer, [name]!”
All of these feign sincerity to some degree.
The difference with the deepfaked video thankery linked here is that it's not well-known to be fake yet.
There will be an initial period where people are impressed by it (they sent flowers!), then disappointed, betrayed, and tricked to learn that the gesture was automated.
Shame it leaves such a sense of disgust in most people here, to judge by the comments so far. They may have picked the wrong crowd.
He's an investor.
>* - Of those that didn't receive a personalized video from me, only 3.75% purchased from us again in those 60 days.*
>* - Of those that received a personalized video from me, 7.02% purchased from us again in those 60 days.*
On one hand this is in my opinion a bit narrow-minded/short-term. Let's see what happens once people understand that the video wasn't personal (that they were tricked to think that it was?) + once a few more companies start doing the same thing.
On the other hand, I can believe that having videos which mention your name (let's be a visionary: let's imagine that e.g. Facebook's user profiles or similar stuff can be used, therefore that even some funny/happy comments can be added to the video mentioning e.g. some of your favourite things like stuff you like to eat/read/do or your favourite color etc...) can be somehow more entertaining or at least more "engaging" (as it's currently one of the most favourite buzzwords used in the Internet) compared to plain old-style videos.
But: that reminds me of the few times when I was sitting in a room (or I was in a conference call) and there was another person that had the same name as mine => each-single-time that that person's name was mentioned (same as mine) I got stressed (suddenly having to pay attention) and after 1-2 hours I was tired even if I actually didn't have to interact at all => I can think that such strategy, involving ~personalized videos, might have the same effect, meaning that people can only focus on few things that try to get their attention before starting to feel tired.
BTW.: I noticed just now, for the first time since years, that the comments-window can be resized :P I now do feel quite stupid, but I still feel like celebrating, hehe. Until today I wrote all my comments in the window having its default size, which is quite tiny... :D
Then you send the 237 Mikes the same video but now it is not a deepfake. Once a week or month you sit down and record any new names for half an hour or so.
Longer time sure but not 10k videos long like he implies.
And, let's be real, that day is probably tomorrow now that we all know the SaaS [Sincerity As A Service] industry 2.0 exists.